"Ekonomipriset till William Nordhaus är en skamfläck"
Det s盲gs ofta att utdelningen av fredspriset till Henry Kissinger 盲r den skamligaste episoden i Nobelprisets historia men fr氓gan 盲r om inte ekonomipriset till William Nordhaus 盲r v盲rre. Nordhaus har n盲mligen under m氓nga 氓r varit den mest framtr盲dande f枚respr氓karen f枚r att h氓lla tillbaka med klimat氓tg盲rder, med argumentet att vi i framtiden 盲r rikare och d氓 kommer att ha b盲ttre r氓d. I en v盲rld av 盲ndliga resurser m氓ste man prioritera mellan dagens och framtidens behov, menar han. The Economist () liknade hans logik vid att det f枚r oss att minska klimatp氓verkan idag f枚r att gagna framtidens m盲nniskor vore motsvarigheten till att be fattiga b枚nder p氓 1800-talet att fr氓ng氓 sin kornv盲lling f枚r att vi idag skulle ha fler datorer. Bakom den 丑盲谤 slutsatsen (kan man verkligen skicka kornv盲lling till framtiden?) ligger en sammanblandning av monet盲ra och fysiska resurser, mellan resurser som 盲r f枚rnybara och 盲ndliga. Om vi br盲nner olja idag finns det mindre av den kvar om hundra 氓r, men om vi investerar hundra miljarder i f枚rnybar el idag finns det varken fler eller f盲rre miljarder att investera i det om hundra 氓r. Omst盲llningen till ett f枚rnybart samh盲lle 盲r framf枚rallt en fr氓ga om arbetstimmar, och de kan vi inte spara och skicka 氓t v氓ra 盲ttlingar. D盲remot kan vi spara v氓ra ekosystem. Nordhaus ser klimat氓tg盲rder som kostnader och inte som investeringar. Man hade lika g盲rna kunnat v盲nda p氓 hans argument och h盲vda att om man ska g枚ra en investering i klimat氓tg盲rder 盲r det b盲ttre att g枚ra det s氓 tidigt s氓 m枚jligt s氓 att avkastningen blir st枚rre. Vill man hellre investera 1000 kronor i en indexfond idag eller om 20 氓r? Nordhaus argument blir 盲nnu konstigare om man bet盲nker att uppv盲rmningen knappast 盲r en linj盲r process utan kantas av tr枚skeleffekter och 氓terkopplingsmekanismer som pl枚tsligt kan f氓 uppv盲rmningen att skena iv盲g exponentiellt. D盲rf枚r borde man s盲tta in s氓 stora insatser som m枚jligt tidigt i processen innan den f枚rsvinner bortom kontroll. P氓 senare 氓r har Nordhaus 盲ndrat sin inst盲llning och insett att det inte alls 盲r smart att v盲nta utan att vi helst borde ha gjort n氓got 氓t klimatf枚r盲ndringen f枚r l盲nge sedan. Tack f枚r den geniala insikten. Det 盲r intressant att den stora f枚respr氓karen f枚r att 鈥漵kynda l氓ngsamt鈥 f氓r pris samtidigt som IPCCs nya klimatrapport () anger att det nu kr盲vs omedelbara och fundamentala f枚r盲ndringar i hela samh盲llet f枚r att vi ska ha n氓gon chans att undvika fullst盲ndig katastrof.
Max Jerneck, forskare om h氓llbara energisystem
L盲s en f枚rdjupande kommentar av Max Jerneck 丑盲谤.
How Nordhaus and Romer can cool the global warming
The significance of Nordhaus and Romer winning the Nobel Prize in Economics 2018, on the day after the publication of the , adds a positive dimension towards meeting the global environmental challenges. This report calls for the impact of global warming to be limited to 1.5掳C, whichrequires a strengthened global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty. Nordhaus鈥 research on economic analysis of climate change propagates the use of carbon taxation to reduce emissions whereas Romer鈥檚 research shows how well-regulated markets can lead to technological development and sustainable economic growth.
Nordhaus has done extensive work on climate change models. His work on in 鈥溾 raises the critical issue of sustainability. Refining his earlier work, Nordhaus developed a general approach to estimating the costs of climate change (). He argues that climate change should be considered a 鈥済lobal public good,鈥 but should not be regulated, through a command-and-control approach. Instead, the market forces should be employed by agreeing on a global price (by trade or taxes) for burning carbon that reflects its full cost (including externalities). Nordhaus has also written part of the that gave the US government the right to regulate as yet unmentioned pollutants in the future.
Romer鈥檚 work furthers our understanding of the long-term determinants of economic growth and the importance of technological change and innovations. He demonstrates how economic forces govern the willingness of firms to produce new ideas and innovations. His led to the development of the endogenous growth theory, that explains how ideas are different and require specific conditions to thrive in a market. Romer explains that the non-rival nature of ideas can boost ongoing and 鈥渆ndogenous鈥 economic growth. His research has generated further research into the regulations and policies that encourage new ideas and long-term prosperity. Romer鈥檚 work on economics of growth has led to the concept of , an economic region with external or foreign governance, so as to enforce the rule of law and stimulate economic growth. Romerargues that policy makers should stop trying to adjust the business cycle and instead focus on promoting new technology.
Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, Paris Agreement and the IPCC special report 鈥 all point to the incremental environmental challenges. While Nordhaus and Romer suggest that market forces can resolve these challenges through carbon taxation and technological development, Nordhaus himself warns of problems. In a , Nordhaus cautions that it is 鈥渦nlikely鈥 that nations can achieve the 2掳Ctarget outlined in the Paris Agreement and acknowledges that the 鈥渃arbon price needed to achieve current targets has risen over time as policies have been delayed.鈥
Written by Professor Ranjula Bali Swain, ranjula.bali@hhs.se
Visiting Professor at Misum, leading the research platform on Innovating Markets. She is also a Professor of Economics at S枚dert枚rn University, Stockholm